Is it not blatant ad hominem to accuse people effectively of unsafe practice without knowing or researching the first thing about how they go about their business? Or knowing what hazard analyses, risk mitigations or regulatory clearances are in place?
Not really. Blatant ad hominem would be to incorrectly accuse someone of.. well, blatant ad hominem I suppose.
Trouble is, I couldn't find what hazard analyses, risk mitigations or regulatory clearances were in place given no published guidelines exist, so I assumed it must be lunacy.
Thankfully Tim has put my mind at rest - it's clearly a robust and well thought through operation, a veritable swiss watch! Tim - and indeed anyone else - please do accept my apologies if any offence was caused!